Either/or

[saveliberty]

You are nothing new or unique MB, we get posters like you here all the time. This is all well worn ground.

 

[percysunshine]

Rich people are evil. Corporations are evil. I just see a lot of hate coming from you MB. You label groups and attack.

I don't think rich people are evil, anymore than I think drug addicts are evil. They are victims of a system that exploits their own vices just as much as anyone. I think obscene wealth is a bad thing for anyone.

Sooo ... Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, two of the richest politicians on the planet earth, are victims of the 'system'.


Does reality ever intrude into the cranial storage lot?

.

 

[Mount Brocken]

Rich people are evil. Corporations are evil. I just see a lot of hate coming from you MB. You label groups and attack.

I don't think rich people are evil, anymore than I think drug addicts are evil. They are victims of a system that exploits their own vices just as much as anyone. I think obscene wealth is a bad thing for anyone.

Really? How much of that wealth has Bill Gates and other very wealthy people donated back to charity?

You can see the moral superiority you feel in this post.

Two or three people out of a vast majority. And besides, it is better to earn than to be given in charity. Charity should be for those that are in rare situations, it shouldn't be the rule, it should be the exception.

 

[Mount Brocken]

Rich people are evil. Corporations are evil. I just see a lot of hate coming from you MB. You label groups and attack.

I don't think rich people are evil, anymore than I think drug addicts are evil. They are victims of a system that exploits their own vices just as much as anyone. I think obscene wealth is a bad thing for anyone.

Sooo ... Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, two of the richest politicians on the planet earth, are victims of the 'system'.


Does reality ever intrude into the cranial storage lot?

.

Yes...greed has them in their clutches. I am not a fan of either. They say one thing and do another.

 

[saveliberty]

Rich people are evil. Corporations are evil. I just see a lot of hate coming from you MB. You label groups and attack.

I don't think rich people are evil, anymore than I think drug addicts are evil. They are victims of a system that exploits their own vices just as much as anyone. I think obscene wealth is a bad thing for anyone.

Really? How much of that wealth has Bill Gates and other very wealthy people donated back to charity?

You can see the moral superiority you feel in this post.

Two or three people out of a vast majority. And besides, it is better to earn than to be given in charity. Charity should be for those that are in rare situations, it shouldn't be the rule, it should be the exception.

Charity is freely given by the grantor. Taxes are a taking of property, which by definition is theft. Obscene wealth constitutes a vast majority? Interesting.

 

[Mount Brocken]

Work overtime or get a second job.

Why should someone have to work overtime just to get by? If there is evidence that profits are low, I would say yes. But for the most part this is not the case. Productivity is high, profits are high, therefore I see no reason for this.

Because wealth by definition means you have more than another. Therefore you do something more to achieve it. It is not an entitlement as is implied in your post.

You can get more by not doing anything at all. Stocks, existing wealth and capital can all generate large amounts of income for doing practically nothing at all.

 

[percysunshine]

Rich people are evil. Corporations are evil. I just see a lot of hate coming from you MB. You label groups and attack.

I don't think rich people are evil, anymore than I think drug addicts are evil. They are victims of a system that exploits their own vices just as much as anyone. I think obscene wealth is a bad thing for anyone.

Sooo ... Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, two of the richest politicians on the planet earth, are victims of the 'system'.


Does reality ever intrude into the cranial storage lot?

.

Yes...greed has them in their clutches. I am not a fan of either. They say one thing and do another.

So ... your discomfort concerns their blatant hypocrisy more than their wealth.

I knew I was going to like you.

.

 

[saveliberty]

Work overtime or get a second job.

Why should someone have to work overtime just to get by? If there is evidence that profits are low, I would say yes. But for the most part this is not the case. Productivity is high, profits are high, therefore I see no reason for this.

Because wealth by definition means you have more than another. Therefore you do something more to achieve it. It is not an entitlement as is implied in your post.

You can get more by not doing anything at all. Stocks, existing wealth and capital can all generate large amounts of income for doing practically nothing at all.

Only if you reinvest it. That money is then available for mortgages and car loans, expanding businesses, creating jobs. Oh how dreadful. It isn't doing nothing at all, it is a form of risk taking.

 

[Mount Brocken]

Rich people are evil. Corporations are evil. I just see a lot of hate coming from you MB. You label groups and attack.

I don't think rich people are evil, anymore than I think drug addicts are evil. They are victims of a system that exploits their own vices just as much as anyone. I think obscene wealth is a bad thing for anyone.

Really? How much of that wealth has Bill Gates and other very wealthy people donated back to charity?

You can see the moral superiority you feel in this post.

Two or three people out of a vast majority. And besides, it is better to earn than to be given in charity. Charity should be for those that are in rare situations, it shouldn't be the rule, it should be the exception.

Charity is freely given by the grantor. Taxes are a taking of property, which by definition is theft. Obscene wealth constitutes a vast majority? Interesting.

Taxes are not theft if the citizen owning the property has a government that procures protection of the rights of that person to keep the property. The Constitution grants rights to the government to collect taxes.

And you are asking something about obscene wealth constituting a vast majority? Do you mean of contributors to charities or something else, not sure what you mean?

 

[Mount Brocken]

You are nothing new or unique MB, we get posters like you here all the time. This is all well worn ground.

I am glad I am not unique. We need more people thinking like this!

 

[saveliberty]

I can assure you government does not protect property, they seek to separate you from it despite Constitutional protections. You are attempting the same.

 

[Mount Brocken]

Rich people are evil. Corporations are evil. I just see a lot of hate coming from you MB. You label groups and attack.

I don't think rich people are evil, anymore than I think drug addicts are evil. They are victims of a system that exploits their own vices just as much as anyone. I think obscene wealth is a bad thing for anyone.

Sooo ... Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, two of the richest politicians on the planet earth, are victims of the 'system'.


Does reality ever intrude into the cranial storage lot?

.

Yes...greed has them in their clutches. I am not a fan of either. They say one thing and do another.

So ... your discomfort concerns their blatant hypocrisy more than their wealth.

I knew I was going to like you.

.

Well I do not like hypocrisy and that is why I do not support the Democrats. But I dislike obscene wealth at the expense of others, so I dislike GOP philosophy as well.

 

[Mount Brocken]

I can assure you government does not protect property, they seek to separate you from it despite Constitutional protections.

Oh I don't think our current government structure is competent or willing to protect people's rights.

 

[saveliberty]

The structure is fine, it is the people who seek to use it to control others that is the problem. That is a problem you are supporting with your ideas.

 

[Mount Brocken]

Work overtime or get a second job.

Why should someone have to work overtime just to get by? If there is evidence that profits are low, I would say yes. But for the most part this is not the case. Productivity is high, profits are high, therefore I see no reason for this.

Because wealth by definition means you have more than another. Therefore you do something more to achieve it. It is not an entitlement as is implied in your post.

You can get more by not doing anything at all. Stocks, existing wealth and capital can all generate large amounts of income for doing practically nothing at all.

Only if you reinvest it. That money is then available for mortgages and car loans, expanding businesses, creating jobs. Oh how dreadful. It isn't doing nothing at all, it is a form of risk taking.

It is also a risk working for a company. They could lay one off, the business could go under and then getting another job could take a long time, to where, bills are piling up. I certainly feel for investors of little wealth that risk their money in the stock market or some other business venture. However, the wealthy typically have theirs spread out, to where, risk is not an issue at all.

 

[Mount Brocken]

The structure is fine, it is the people who seek to use it to control others that is the problem. That is a problem you are supporting with your ideas.

Like I said, I don't seek to control others but to protect the rights of workers and laborers. The market controls others quite well with its economic leverage over the poor. Now THAT is control!

 

[saveliberty]

Work overtime or get a second job.

Why should someone have to work overtime just to get by? If there is evidence that profits are low, I would say yes. But for the most part this is not the case. Productivity is high, profits are high, therefore I see no reason for this.

Because wealth by definition means you have more than another. Therefore you do something more to achieve it. It is not an entitlement as is implied in your post.

You can get more by not doing anything at all. Stocks, existing wealth and capital can all generate large amounts of income for doing practically nothing at all.

Only if you reinvest it. That money is then available for mortgages and car loans, expanding businesses, creating jobs. Oh how dreadful. It isn't doing nothing at all, it is a form of risk taking.

It is also a risk working for a company. They could lay one off, the business could go under and then getting another job could take a long time, to where, bills are piling up. I certainly feel for investors of little wealth that risk their money in the stock market or some other business venture. However, the wealthy typically have theirs spread out, to where, risk is not an issue at all.

All invest has risk. Have you ever owned a business? The employee has very limited risk compared to the owner. The employee can also leave tomorrow for another job and the business owner has to find and train a new one.

 

[saveliberty]

The structure is fine, it is the people who seek to use it to control others that is the problem. That is a problem you are supporting with your ideas.

Like I said, I don't seek to control others but to protect the rights of workers and laborers. The market controls others quite well with its economic leverage over the poor. Now THAT is control!

What rights of workers and laborers?

 

[Mount Brocken]

Work overtime or get a second job.

Why should someone have to work overtime just to get by? If there is evidence that profits are low, I would say yes. But for the most part this is not the case. Productivity is high, profits are high, therefore I see no reason for this.

Because wealth by definition means you have more than another. Therefore you do something more to achieve it. It is not an entitlement as is implied in your post.

You can get more by not doing anything at all. Stocks, existing wealth and capital can all generate large amounts of income for doing practically nothing at all.

Only if you reinvest it. That money is then available for mortgages and car loans, expanding businesses, creating jobs. Oh how dreadful. It isn't doing nothing at all, it is a form of risk taking.

It is also a risk working for a company. They could lay one off, the business could go under and then getting another job could take a long time, to where, bills are piling up. I certainly feel for investors of little wealth that risk their money in the stock market or some other business venture. However, the wealthy typically have theirs spread out, to where, risk is not an issue at all.

All invest has risk. Have you ever owned a business? The employee has very limited risk compared to the owner. The employee can also leave tomorrow for another job and the business owner has to find and train a new one.

I think that asking someone if they have owned a business is like asking someone if they have had a pet. Not all are the same. Small businesses and large ones are like night and day. I support small businesses, it is the big ones I have a problem with.

 

[Mount Brocken]

The structure is fine, it is the people who seek to use it to control others that is the problem. That is a problem you are supporting with your ideas.

Like I said, I don't seek to control others but to protect the rights of workers and laborers. The market controls others quite well with its economic leverage over the poor. Now THAT is control!

What rights of workers and laborers?

The right to own a portion of their production which comes from their labor.